Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, the question is kinda in the thread title.

For personal use, I compiled the 40k rules from all publications (rulebook, CA17, CA18, various errata, various FAQ) into a single document for my personal ease-of-play.
The 40k core rules, along with all changes through errata and FAQ are free to download from Games-Workshop.
Obviously, I can't share the rules that are hidden behind a paywall (Advanced Rules, CA).

But what about the edited Core Rules, that are available for free for anyone to download anyway?

I asked the GW legal department about this, and they confirmed I can't share their copyrighted material.
When asked about the freely available downloads, the answer was a bit more murky, and boiled down to "there will be likely no consequences" IF it's not edited.

The GW website for Itellectual Property Policy (https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Intellectual-Property-Policy) doesn't make this destinction, and I would fulfill all the requirements, except the Copyright thing, which is kinda up to GW if they ask me to take it down or turn a blind eye.

I know Dakka can't give me legal advice, but my question is this: if I post the edited Core Rules (consiting of the freely available Core Rules + the changes from the various errata/FAQ edited in), will Dakka delete the post?

I am not a lawyer, but from my laymans knowledge of copyright law, you legally cannot without written permission from Games Workshop Group PLC. They still own the rights, they get to decide how and when it's distributed. Being freely available on the internet doesn't make it public domain.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I am not a lawyer, but from my laymans knowledge of copyright law, you legally cannot without written permission from Games Workshop Group PLC. They still own the rights, they get to decide how and when it's distributed. Being freely available on the internet doesn't make it public domain.

Im not a lawyer, but it would depend how you define some thing being in the public domain, since technically it is already in that.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I am not a lawyer, but from my laymans knowledge of copyright law, you legally cannot without written permission from Games Workshop Group PLC. They still own the rights, they get to decide how and when it's distributed. Being freely available on the internet doesn't make it public domain.

Yeah, I know, and that's not what I asked. GW doesn't give out permissions. But they hinted at turning a blind eye, if it's freely available.

 Stormatious wrote:
Im not a lawyer, but it would depend how you define some thing being in the public domain, since technically it is already in that.

Public Domain has a very specific meaning, it's not synonymous with "public distribution".

 Hanskrampf wrote:
Yeah, I know, and that's not what I asked. GW doesn't give out permissions. But they hinted at turning a blind eye, if it's freely available.

FWIW I was previously refused permission to post a guide for legal things that might upset GW.

 Hanskrampf wrote:
I know Dakka can't give me legal advice

This is the best, most direct answer we can give you about this. Also, we of course reserve the right to delete anything a user might post — so we can’t give you a guarantee that a post or picture, etc., will never get deleted.

I will say that GW has on several occasions in the past reached out to us to say they wanted something removed and of course GW has not done this in every instance in which GW might reasonably make some kind of IP claim as to material posted here.

 Manchu wrote:

 Hanskrampf wrote:
I know Dakka can't give me legal advice

This is the best, most direct answer we can give you about this. Also, we of course reserve the right to delete anything a user might post — so we can’t give you a guarantee that a post or picture, etc., will never get deleted.

I will say that GW has on several occasions in the past reached out to us to say they wanted something removed and of course GW has not done this in every instance in which GW might reasonably make some kind of IP claim as to material posted here.

Thank your for your answer. This is all very good to know.

 Stormatious wrote:
Im not a lawyer, but it would depend how you define some thing being in the public domain, since technically it is already in that.

No, it isn't at all. Public domain means that nobody has any ownership over it, not that the owner is currently allowing people to view the content for free. Otherwise you'd have nonsensical situations like a news website having no IP rights over the contents of their front page because you can read an article without paying for it. GW has chosen to allow free viewing of certain documents, but still has ownership over them. They could, at any time, remove the free download and make you pay for it, block you from selling your own copies, etc. However, two things are worth noting:

1) Rules for playing a game can not be copyrighted (at least in the US). The text expressing those rules can be copyrighted, in cases where it is sufficiently creative and not merely a basic statement of facts, but the rules themselves can not. So, for example, GW's opinion that it is illegal to post point costs is complete fiction. It is 100% legal to post point costs for units/upgrades as they are not creative works and not copyrighted.

2) The "fair use" rule allows posting limited excerpts from even copyrighted material for purposes of commentary. So, for example, it is 100% legal to post leaked images from the upcoming WD so everyone can discuss them. You can't just post the entire magazine for download, but despite GW's opinion otherwise it's legal to post a picture of the new releases or a quote of the new rules or whatever.

Unfortunately GW disagrees with these two facts and seems to operate under a policy of "we have more money to spend on lawyers, copyright means whatever we say it does" and makes claims about their supposed IP rights that go well beyond what they actually have.

 Peregrine wrote:
Unfortunately GW disagrees with these two facts and seems to operate under a policy of "we have more money to spend on lawyers, copyright means whatever we say it does" and makes claims about their supposed IP rights that go well beyond what they actually have.

To play devils advocate, that isn't something unique to GW, but I agree it's not good.

Freely available downloads are protected by copyright.

Unless you get permission from GW, unfortunately you can't modify and redistribute their materials even if they are available free.

It's like that page in an RPG book which is a character sheet, and it says "permission granted to photocopy for personal use only." Right there is a permission for personal use, but even though it's free, you can't take that sheet and modify it and publish it. You haven't been granted a permission.

I work as anti-piracy officer in a licensing and permissions team in a large publisher and I have professional knowledge about this.

The thing about this is, if you contact GW and describe what you want to do, they may grant you permission. (Or maybe not, but it's worth the effort.)

The other thing is, unless you distribute and/or sell a crap-load of your modified derivative product in a very obvious manner, GW probably will never notice what you've done.

Kilkrazy is definitely the most knowledgeable about this, and gives about as complete an answer as we can, imo.

Unfortunately, we can't be clearer than GW's legal team themselves . It sounds to me like the gist of it is that it's technically something you shouldn't do, but unlikely to get into trouble over.

But as noted, we have been asked to take things down before, so that also means we can't give any guarantees, either =/

Sorry for the murkiness, it's just a murky issue!